After Backing Occupation, Iraqi Leftists Try Recasting Their Fortune

[KurtFF8]

Source (http://english.al-akhbar.com/content/after-backing-occupation-iraqi-leftists-try-recasting-their-fortune)


By: Alaa al-Lami (http://english.al-akhbar.com/author/alaa-al-lami) Published Friday, November 25, 2011

Iraq’s disgraced Communist Party is trying to revive its fortunes by creating a new political formation.
A few days ago, a conference was held in Baghdad for a political movement calling itself the Union of Forces and Figures of the Iraqi Democratic Movement.
The gathering was organized by the Iraqi Communist Party – Central Committee headed by MP Hamid Majid Mousa, who served on the Iraqi Interim Governing Council when Paul Bremer ruled the country.
The delegates belong to small and marginal Iraqi political groups, with the Communist Party being the largest among them.Efforts to establish the party began by holding a preparatory meeting on October 22. The conference included 186 delegates from inside and outside Iraq with the exception of the Kurdish provinces. The delegates belong to small and marginal Iraqi political groups, with the Communist Party being the largest among them.
Their political views are described as democratic, liberal, leftist, Islamist, and progressive. But all of the groups present endorse the existing political system, which was created by the US occupation and is based on sectarian and ethnic quotas.
Participants in the conference received congratulations and greetings from both Iraqi President Jalal Talabani and the president of the Iraqi Kurdistan Region, Masoud Barzani.
The leadership of the conference reciprocated by thanking the two men for their “material and moral support for the conference.” Ayad Allawi’s Iraqi National List also sent messages of support.
Religious Shia and Sunni parties, on the other hand, kept their distance from the new party. So did leftist and Arab nationalist parties, along with forces opposed to the occupation. The Sadrist movement and the Worker-Communist Party of Iraq also did not attend.
the political forces who make up this new party were the very same people who assisted the US occupation in creating the existing sectarian and ethnic system in the first placeThe closing statement of the conference surprised many observers by declaring that the party seeks to “unite the efforts of pro-democracy figures and forces, reforming the political process, and eliminating whatever prevents building a real democracy away from a sectarian and ethnic quota system.” Critics pointed out that the political forces who make up this new party were the very same people who assisted the US occupation in creating the existing sectarian and ethnic system in the first place.
The only thing that was conspicuously absent from the conference and its closing statement is the US occupation, which was never mentioned. In fact 2003 is referred to as the “year of change” in the party’s discourse and literature.
As a result, many leftist and pro-democracy writers and activists, who are opposed to the US occupation and sectarianism, boycotted the conference.
Analysts viewed the conference as an attempt by the leadership of the Communist Party to revive its fortunes ahead of the next parliamentary elections.
Former member of the Communist Party, Nizar Rahk, bitterly criticized the new formation, portraying it as an attempt to liquidate the party altogether.
“The party seeks to pull nationalist Iraqis and technocratic cadres into the same quagmire without reviewing its political calculations or answering questions asked by Iraqis, and especially by communists and leftists about the real reason behind the party’s political failure,” he said.
This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.

[Geiseric]

What's the workers communist party of iraq?

[A Revolutionary Tool]

Their "Communist" Party sounds a lot like our "Communist" Party.

[cheguvera]

communism or socialism is not possible in muslim world .Islam will be a great challenge for the global revolution.

[Sasha]

communism or socialism is not possible in muslim world .Islam will be a great challenge for the global revolution.


care to expand?

[Welshy]

What's the workers communist party of iraq?

I wish I could give you a quick summary myself, but I don't know enough about the party itself to give you one. So here is the wikipedia link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker-communist_Party_of_Iraq

It's one of two Workers' Communist Parties in Iraq, the other being the Left Workers' Communist Party. The WCPI is connected to the Workers' Communist Party of Iran-Hekmatist and the LWCPI is connected to the Workers' Communist Party of Iran. The Workers' Communist Party of Iraq is also connected to the Workers' Communist Party of Kurdistan.

[Smyg]

communism or socialism is not possible in muslim world .Islam will be a great challenge for the global revolution.

Don't be such a prejudiced reactionary.

[Threetune]

communism or socialism is not possible in muslim world .Islam will be a great challenge for the global revolution.



Imperialism is the "great challenge for the global revolution".

[Crux]

I wish I could give you a quick summary myself, but I don't know enough about the party itself to give you one. So here is the wikipedia link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker-communist_Party_of_Iraq

It's one of two Workers' Communist Parties in Iraq, the other being the Left Workers' Communist Party. The WCPI is connected to the Workers' Communist Party of Iran-Hekmatist and the LWCPI is connected to the Workers' Communist Party of Iran. The Workers' Communist Party of Iraq is also connected to the Workers' Communist Party of Kurdistan.
Well the long story is this sometime in the late 70's a group of people in Iran, I forget the name evolved from their maoist past into an anti-stalinist albeit guerillaist position. This group was known as the Iranian Communist Party, they are still around and explicitly state that they've never supported china, the soviet union, cuba or albania (lol). However in the late 80's early 90's Mansoor Hekmhat and his crew split from the ICP taking with them large swathes of their non-kurdish organization, the split was mostly over the issue of guerillaism, where hekmhat favoured going into the factories instead, also he had some kind of back to marx idea and a statecap analysis of the former eastern bloc. He founded the Worker's Communist Party, in 2004 Hekmhat died and the WPI imploded into, at least five parties, some of which include the WPI, WPI Hekmhatist and the United WPI. Yeah. These have sister orgs in Iraq and apparently Kurdistan.

[cheguvera]

Imperialism is the "great challenge for the global revolution".
capitalism is the great challenge.
But socialism revolution is different from islamic revolution.The revolution launched by ayathulla komeni in iran is not same as the russian revolution.Islamic countries are not matured enough to get in to a real revolution.Next global revolution could be a real revolution.
Capitalism did not win over the socialism.It is the democracy & freedom that won over the communism.But unfortunately it paved the way to brutal capitalism & super rich controlled political system in russia.

[Apoi_Viitor]

The revolution launched by ayathulla komeni in iran is not same as the russian revolution.

Actually, religious fundamentalism is really not that popular in Iran. It's certainly not held by the majority of Iranians. The only reason the Khomeini came to power was because he was simply able to muster up more followers then everyone else. Furthermore, there was a strong leftist demographic behind the Iranian revolution, as forecased by the many socialist and communist parties which were prominent during the revolution.

[Apoi_Viitor]

Capitalism did not win over the socialism.It is the democracy & freedom that won over the communism.

Oh god, you sound just like Zizek...

[Chambered Word]

capitalism is the great challenge.
But socialism revolution is different from islamic revolution.The revolution launched by ayathulla komeni in iran is not same as the russian revolution.Islamic countries are not matured enough to get in to a real revolution.Next global revolution could be a real revolution.
Capitalism did not win over the socialism.It is the democracy & freedom that won over the communism.But unfortunately it paved the way to brutal capitalism & super rich controlled political system in russia.

The revolution wasn't launched by Khomenei and you're full of shit.

[cheguvera]

The revolution wasn't launched by Khomenei and you're full of shit.


September 1902[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruhollah_Khomeini#cite_note-birth1-0)[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruhollah_Khomeini#cite_note-1)[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruhollah_Khomeini#cite_note-site_of_Islamic_Revolution_Leader-2) – 3 June 1989) was an Iranian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran) religious leader and politician, and leader of the 1979 Iranian Revolution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_Revolution) which saw the overthrow of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Reza_Pahlavi), the Shah (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pahlavi_dynasty) of Iran. Following the revolution, Khomeini became the country's Supreme Leader (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Leader_of_Iran) — a position created in the constitution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Islamic_Republic_of_Iran) as the highest ranking political and religious authority of the nation — until his death
He was the most influential figure in 1979 revolution.

[Ostrinski]

capitalism is the great challenge.
But socialism revolution is different from islamic revolution.The revolution launched by ayathulla komeni in iran is not same as the russian revolution.Islamic countries are not matured enough to get in to a real revolution.Next global revolution could be a real revolution.
Capitalism did not win over the socialism.It is the democracy & freedom that won over the communism.But unfortunately it paved the way to brutal capitalism & super rich controlled political system in russia.My face resembled that of KurtFF8's avatar when reading this.

[Rocky Rococo]

The revolution launched by ayathulla komeni in iran is not same as the russian revolution.Islamic countries are not matured enough to get in to a real revolution.

In comparison to Russia 1917, Iran 1979 was remarkably modernized and advanced, and theocracy was at very least as deeply entrenched, if not moreso, in Orthodox Holy Mother Russia, as Twelver Shi'ism was in Iran at the end of the Shah's reign.

[#FF0000]

Capitalism did not win over the socialism.It is the democracy & freedom that won over the communism

No no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no

[cheguvera]

No no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no
russians did not ask capitalism in 1989.They asked freedom & democracy. they were given capitalism instead.Democracy can pump super rich controlled politicians in to the system.That is the case every where. this can be addressed by opting out permanent people or leaders.That is why we have anarchism.Russian should have injected the anarchism in to their system.

[cheguvera]

with religions you will make a fake revolution.It is the bitter truth when you consider islam, christianity or hinidunism.Hindunism preached about cast system.It means birth make you superior from low casts.No one care of plight of low cast people in india.Even indian communist party has ignored their problems.

[Chambered Word]

He was the most influential figure in 1979 revolution.

if you believe that figures are the ones who make history, yes, khomeinei sprung from nowhere and declared Iran a theocratic oppressive state with the wave of his hand. when you push silly little things like 'facts' out of the way it's easy to forget the role that workers played in the revolution before it was crushed.

[Sendo]

communism or socialism is not possible in muslim world .Islam will be a great challenge for the global revolution.

Tell me about! Just look at the Yugoslav partisans and the Albanian partisans. They didn't accomplish diddly squat in Muslim-majority regions.

And it's not like the ex-president of the most populous Muslim country on Earth was a woman.

You can always trust that Muslims are the most backwards of all the world religions.



(sarcasm!)

[Sendo]

with religions you will make a fake revolution.It is the bitter truth when you consider islam, christianity or hinidunism.Hindunism preached about cast system.It means birth make you superior from low casts.No one care of plight of low cast people in india.Even indian communist party has ignored their problems.

That doesn't mean that there aren't legit communists armed and fighting to roll back the caste system. Stop acting like place X and place Y aren't suitable for revolution. Half of Americans don't believe in the facts of global warming or the theory* of evolution. (*Only a "theory" because the only way to prove it would be to build a time machine. But we're 99.9% sure)

[Ocean Seal]

In comparison to Russia 1917, Iran 1979 was remarkably modernized and advanced, and theocracy was at very least as deeply entrenched, if not moreso, in Orthodox Holy Mother Russia, as Twelver Shi'ism was in Iran at the end of the Shah's reign.
Yes, listen to this point because it speaks truth.


russians did not ask capitalism in 1989.They asked freedom & democracy. they were given capitalism instead.Democracy can pump super rich controlled politicians in to the system.That is the case every where. this can be addressed by opting out permanent people or leaders.That is why we have anarchism.Russian should have injected the anarchism in to their system.
Care to show me some evidence of this "freedom and democracy" stuff from genuine Marxist sources or at least some critical thought about it? Or do you basically want to repeat Gorbachev verbatim.

I'll elaborate on why (I think) the SU failed. Because it was a state-capitalist regime which wasn't bent on building socialism. Because Gorbachev was more capitalist than Reagan and didn't give a flying fuck about the will of the people, about the referendum, was an open anti-communist. See Ismail's signature for a link, and he just wanted to fuel his desires for restoring capitalism completely. Now the Soviet Union had also lost their initiative for building socialism at several stages of its history. The first being after the Soviet Union was under siege from capital during the Civil War. However, I would argue that here it retreated to a stage of "building socialism" which I think lasted through the Stalin era (It can also be argued that when one speaks of "building socialism" it is fundamentally contradictory as a capitalist administration cannot build socialism). This was however, torn apart by Khrushchev completely when his administration introduced blatantly capitalist liberalizations. And of course this led to more and more liberalizations. Eventually the Soviet Union became a tier two capitalist country (ala Libya) and through the contradictions of capital, Western agitation, Gorbachev capitulated to the United States. And no the people didn't want western democracy for the most part. Gorbachev did, and because the SU wasn't run by the people the bureaucrats made the choices.



with religions you will make a fake revolution.
So everyone in Russia was an atheist in 1917?



It is the bitter truth when you consider islam, christianity or hinidunism.Hindunism preached about cast system.It means birth make you superior from low casts.No one care of plight of low cast people in india.Even indian communist party has ignored their problems.
No they haven't.

[cheguvera]

I'll elaborate on why (I think) the SU failed. Because it was a state-capitalist regime which wasn't bent on building socialism. Because Gorbachev was more capitalist than Reagan and didn't give a flying fuck about the will of the people, about the referendum, was an open anti-communist
I agree with you here.They were capitalists.why people did not fight against this state capitalism?
They were cowards or due to lack of freedom?
In any situation when we have long standing dicatators or rulers, they become elite group & embrace capitalism.

[cheguvera]

So everyone in Russia was an atheist in 1917?


we never saw communism in arab or in any asian muslim country.They are now getting rid of captalists dictators.But they are replaced with super-rich controlled politicians.It will not make any difference to them.We will see semi democracy & freedom their.But that is not a revolution.In muslim world their relgion has an influence on their revolution.
In 1917 we did not see religious revolution.

[KurtFF8]

Right, because as we all know we haven't seen Communism anywhere.

But Republics of the USSR like Azerbaijan were and are predominantly Muslim.

It sounds like you're just wrong here

[Zealot]

The middle east needs a Cultural Revolution

[Ocean Seal]

I agree with you here.They were capitalists.why people did not fight against this state capitalism?
They were cowards or due to lack of freedom?
In any situation when we have long standing dicatators or rulers, they become elite group & embrace capitalism.
Why aren't people fighting regular capitalism in most parts of the world.


we never saw communism in arab or in any asian muslim country.They are now getting rid of captalists dictators.But they are replaced with super-rich controlled politicians.It will not make any difference to them.We will see semi democracy & freedom their.But that is not a revolution.In muslim world their relgion has an influence on their revolution.
In 1917 we did not see religious revolution.
Yes we have. We have seen communism in several predominantly Muslim nations. Including pretty much all of Central Asia and we almost saw it in Afghanistan, but the US funded a fundamentalist regime.

South Korea is strongly anti-communist and they aren't very religious there. China also has a lot of atheists and there isn't a strong communist current there. Same with many of the welfare capitalist states in Scandinavia. Everywhere in the world there will be obstacles for the revolution. Religious fundamentalism which is present in all religions is only part of the story.